The Ballot Bulletin: September 2017

• Redistricting
  • State-by-state redistricting procedures
  • Gerrymandering
• Voting policy
  • Voter identification laws by state
  • Automatic voter registration
  • Early voting
  • Absentee voting
  • Online voter registration
• Ballot access
  • Ballot access for presidential candidates
  • Ballot access for major and minor party candidates
  • List of political parties in the United States

Stay on top of election policy news throughout the states

Email *

First Name

Please complete the Captcha above

In The Ballot Bulletin, Ballotpedia tracks developments in election policy at the federal, state, and local levels. To shed light on the developments, each issue will include an in-depth feature, such as an interview or event timeline. We will also discuss recent prominent events relating to electoral and primary systems, redistricting, and voter provisions.

This month's edition: Last month, in light of recent developments surrounding ranked-choice voting (RCV), we brought you an interview with a city clerk who has first-hand experience in implementing RCV. This month, we're going to dive deep into the world of redistricting. We'll get you caught up on recent developments surrounding redistricting in Texas and North Carolina. We'll also give you the rundown on Gill v. Whitford, the partisan gerrymandering case that the Supreme Court of the United States is hearing next month.

---

This image was created by Zach Weinersmith; it is used here with his permission. The original image can be accessed here.

---

Redistricting in Texas: What's going on and how did we get here?

See also: Redistricting in Texas

In August, a federal court issued orders striking down district maps for two of Texas' congressional districts and 9 of its state House districts. These rulings are the most recent in a series of legal actions over the past six years involving Texas' congressional and state legislative district plans. To get you up to speed, we'll take you back to the very beginning of the 2010 redistricting cycle and identify the key events that brought us here:

• June 17 and July 18, 2011: Governor Rick Perry (R) signed into law the state legislative district and congressional district plans approved by the Republican-controlled legislature in May and June 2011, respectively.
• September 29, 2011: The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas barred implementation of Texas' congressional and state House district plans. The court indicated that it would draft and enforce its own interim plans if the state failed to gain preclearance for the plans adopted by the legislature prior to the opening of the candidate filing period for the 2012 general election cycle. At the time, certain states and jurisdictions, including Texas, were required under the Voting Rights Act to receive preclearance from the federal government before implementing modifications to election laws, including redistricting plans.
• November 23, 2011: The district court issued temporary congressional and state legislative district maps for the 2012 general election. Attorney General Greg Abbott (R) appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of the United States, which stayed the district court's ruling.
• January 20, 2012: The Supreme Court of the United States struck down the district court's interim maps, ruling that the lower court had exceeded its authority.
• February 28, 2012: The district court issued a new set of interim maps. These maps applied to the 2012 election cycle.
• June 26, 2013: Perry signed into law new permanent congressional and state legislative district plans. These maps resembled the second interim maps issued by the district court, though state lawmakers did make some revisions. These new maps were subject to continued legal challenges, but they remained in force for the 2014 and 2016 election cycles.
• July 10, 2017: A federal trial addressing the legality of the 2013 maps began, with Judges Orlando Garcia and Xavier Rodriguez (both of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas) and Judge Jerry Smith (of the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit) presiding. The maps' opponents alleged that the remedial maps, like the original maps adopted in the wake of the 2010 United States Census, unconstitutionally diluted the voting rights of racial minority groups. State officials denied this, maintaining that the remedial maps were substantially the same as those issued by a federal court in 2012. The trial concluded on July 15, 2017.
• August 15, 2017: Judges Smith, Garcia, and Rodriguez issued a unanimous ruling finding that the 2013 remedial maps for congressional districts 27 and 35 had been drawn with racially discriminatory intent on the part of the legislature. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) announced that he would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of the United States.
• August 24, 2017: Judges Smith, Garcia, and Rodriguez issued a unanimous ruling finding that the 2013 remedial maps for the following state House districts had been drawn with racially discriminatory intent on the part of the legislature: districts 103, 104, 105 in Dallas County, districts 32 and 34 in Nueces County, districts 54 and 55 in Bell County, and districts 90 and 93 in Tarrant County.
• August 28, 2017: Associate Justice Samuel Alito of the Supreme Court of the United States stayed the district court's August 15 ruling on Texas' congressional districts pending further review by the high court. On August 31, Alito issued a similar order pertaining to the district court's ruling on Texas' state House districts.

For a more complete breakdown of redistricting events in Texas, click here.

Redistricting in North Carolina: New state legislative district maps approved following court order

See also: Redistricting in North Carolina

• What's the story? On August 30, the General Assembly of North Carolina adopted revised district plans for the state House and Senate.

The new House map pairs incumbents in three districts:

Representatives Jean Farmer-Butterfield (D) and Susan Martin (R) in District 24.

Representatives Jon Hardister and John Faircloth, both Republicans, in District 61.

Representatives Carl Ford and Larry G. Pittman, both Republicans, in District 83.

The new Senate map pairs incumbents in four districts:

Senators Erica Smith-Ingram (D) and Bill Cook (R) in District 3.

Senators Chad Barefoot and John Alexander, both Republicans, in District 18; on August 20, Barefoot announced that he would not seek re-election in 2018.

Senators Joyce Krawiec and Dan Barrett, both Republicans, in District 31.

Senators Deanna Ballard and Shirley Randleman, both Republicans, in District 45.

These redistricting efforts came as the result of a series of court orders issued this summer. On June 5, the Supreme Court of the United States affirmed an earlier district court decision finding that 28 state legislative districts had been subject to an illegal racial gerrymander. The high court, however, directed the district court to reconsider its earlier order calling for special elections in 2017. On July 31, the district court ruled that special elections would not have to take place in 2017, but ordered state lawmakers to draft remedial maps for use in the 2018 elections by September 1, 2017.

• What comes next? The newly adopted maps are now subject to review by the federal district court that struck down the original maps. Barring further judicial intervention, the new House and Senate maps will apply to the 2018 and 2020 election cycles in North Carolina.
• What's going on in the rest of the country? The map below identifies states in which redistricting legislation has been introduced in 2017. A darker shade of red indicates a greater number of relevant bills. For full details about redistricting legislation, see this article.

Redistricting legislation as of August 31, 2017

Case preview: Gill v. Whitford

See also: Gill v. Whitford'

• What's the story? On June 19, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States announced that it would hear Gill v. Whitford, a case involving alleged partisan gerrymandering originating in Wisconsin. On November 21, 2016, the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin struck down the district plan for the Wisconsin State Assembly, finding that the map constituted an illegal partisan gerrymander. The court ruled 2-1 on the matter, with Judges Kenneth Ripple and Barbara Crabb forming the majority (Judge William Griesbach dissented). The district court had ordered state lawmakers to draft new maps by November 1, 2017, but the Supreme Court voted 5-4 to stay this order.
• What comes next? Oral argument in Gill v. Whitford is scheduled to take place on October 3, 2017. A decision is expected sometime in 2018.
• Why does it matter? If the Supreme Court affirms the district court's ruling, it will mark the first time that the high court has struck down a district plan on the grounds of illegal partisan gerrymandering. In contrast with racial gerrymandering, on which the Supreme Court has issued rulings in the past affirming that such practices violate federal law, the high court has never issued a ruling establishing clear precedent on the question of partisan gerrymandering. According to The Wall Street Journal, in an article discussing Gill v. Whitford, "Some Supreme Court justices have previously expressed concern about partisan gerrymandering, but a majority of the court has been hesitant to intervene so directly in the American political process and to say how much partisanship is too much."

To learn more about Gill v. Whitford, see this article.

In other election policy news

• Voter ID in Texas: On August 23, 2017, federal judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos issued an order barring implementation of SB 5, Texas' revised voter ID law, which was signed into law in June. Ramos found that the revised legislation was not "an adequate remedy for the findings of [racially] discriminatory purpose and discriminatory effect in [Texas' original voter ID law]." Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) said that he would appeal Ramos' decision. On September 5, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit voted 2-1 to stay Ramos' ruling. To learn more about Texas' voter ID law, see this article.
• Automatic voter registration in Illinois: On August 28, 2017, Governor Bruce Rauner (R) signed into law SB 1933, which provides for automatic voter registration when voters interact with certain state agencies (including driver's license offices). The law is expected to be implemented in phases, with some agencies (including driver's license agencies) slated to comply with the law in advance of the November 2018 general election and others expected to be compliant by July 2019. Illinois is the 10th state to enact an automatic voter registration policy and the third state to do so in 2017. To learn more about automatic voter registration, see this article.
• Electoral and primary systems legislation: The first map below identifies states in which electoral systems legislation has been introduced in 2017 (including bills pertaining to ranked choice voting). The second map identifies states in which primary systems legislation has been introduced. A darker shade of red indicates a greater number of relevant bills. For full details about electoral systems legislation, see this article. For full details about primary systems legislation, see this article.

Electoral systems legislation as of August 31, 2017

Primary systems legislation as of August 31, 2017

See also

• Election policy on Ballotpedia
• Electoral systems legislation at the state and city levels in the United States, 2017
• Primary systems legislation at the state and city levels in the United States, 2017
• Redistricting legislation at the state and city levels in the United States, 2017
• Federal redistricting legislation in the United States, 2017-2019 (115th Congress)